Latham or Howard? (2 Viewers)

[santaslayer]

Originally posted by Enlightened_One
Then it becomes a question of which is more important, social welfare or economic growth....

Depends on the person, for me right now?....Economic development because I don't get any money from Centrelink!
With economic development underway, automatic stabilisers are obviously used less by the government. Wasn't there a 'trickle down\' theory in HSC economics?.......well yea, I kinda believe in it.
It can be argued that Economic development will cause a greater division in wealth.....but Im sure the 'trickle down' theory will remedy that if it is given a reasonable amount of time, thus, increasing the standard of living amongst 'poorer' people within our community.
I've heard people talk about other social problems Howard has gross oversight towards. Such problems include the HECS fees increase......I am on HECS right now (deferred) , but I wouldn't mind paying for it fully if it was the only option available. I can't see the reason why other people who don't use the system have to pay for it......that would be unfair to people who never touch HECS...so yea.....USER PAYS!

NOTE: user pays does not go to the extent of paying for primary education (everyone needs a healthgy start in life), and other social services like public transport! so please don't play around with words and try to manipulate or disect it


You see, I myself have solved society's problems with a single post...........VOTE SANTASLAYER!

 

[Enlightened_One]

I get exactly where you are coming from Santa Slayer....sort of. Centrelink don't give me nothing though. HECS has me worried. How in the hell I am going to afford it? Guess I'll be deferring. Then I'll have to make money to survive on....
But I'm sure that comes under social welfare. Or rather social development. I'm not sure of what each means exactly....whatever one helps the disadvantaged and aims for equality of wealth and lifestyle is the one I support.

If we really want economic growth then we ought to invest in the smarter people, help them through uni, get rid of the rich who don't have the marks, and therefore create a smart population who are the top of their field. A few more uni places would help this endeavour.

Then at the same time help the average workers and the poor so that everyone contributes to the economy and recieves a decent return for their contribution.

That would raise our economy I'm sure...

If i didn't make much sense it's because I was writing a stream of conciousness with a lack of sleep.

 

[santaslayer]

A family friend who worked as a Qantas auditor straight out of uni (his 33 right now) took 11 years to clear his HECS debt..LoLz

My HECS for this semester only is $2888.06...ahaha..im screwed

 

[Enlightened_One]

I'm looking at law, and the HECS for that is high. Thanks Brendan Nelson, I owe you one mate!

 

[Kwayera]

Fucking Labor is going to screw up this country - or did you all forget that almost-disaster that happened five years ago, that referendum?

Latham will dismiss all our allies, including the US and the UK - bye bye protection, hello terrorism.


Then again, I may be biased, considering that my grandfather was once a Liberal Speaker of the House.

 

[glycerine]

I'm going to be completely honest here, because from my limited interaction with you in like five posts, I respect you.

It's very easy, when you live on the North Shore, and go to a very upper class school, to ignore the blue-collar Australian population. After all, it doesn't necessarily affect you all too much if HECs fees go up or down; you can probably afford to pay full fees. The tax cuts in the latest budget are a *good* thing for your parents; for people not so financially secure, they get diddly squat. You probably don't have to worry about the state of the public health system; chances are, you can easily afford to go private. The Liberal government is in much the same situation - they can - and do! - find it very easy to forget that not everyone has $15,000 a year to spare to send their children to private schooling. The reason I respect Mark Latham, is because he doesn't forget these things. In all his plans for Australia, the lower classes are being taken care of as needed, as are (proportinately) the middle and upper classes. I know where he grew up, it's very close to where I grew up, and is the same place as where my mother grew up. I agreed with the referendum (ie: would have voted yes), as I am very against the monarchy on the whole. Also, Latham does not plan on cutting ties with Bush. I don't think he plans to be his lapdog a la Howard, but assuming that, just because he is not a conservative, that he opposes our ties with the US, is a bit of a generalisation.

In conclusion, I would vote Latham if only my 18th birthday was not about 9 months after the latest date the election could be. : )


Edit: I made some generalisations based on where you live, your school and your grandfather. Sorry if they're incorrect : )

 

[Persephone87]

Howard, because although he has done things I doon't agree with, like go to war, and the bi-lateral agreement with the US (which we don't benefit from at all), Labour hasn't had a good leader for a long time, an Lathams no better. But, pleassse, don't let Costello get in..

 

[Persephone87]

Originally posted by glycerine
It's very easy, when you live on the North Shore, and go to a very upper class school, to ignore the blue-collar Australian population. After all, it doesn't necessarily affect you all too much if HECs fees go up or down; you can probably afford to pay full fees. The tax cuts in the latest budget are a *good* thing for your parents; for people not so financially secure, they get diddly squat. .

Edit: I made some generalisations based on where you live, your school and your grandfather. Sorry if they're incorrect : )

The People who pay 15 000 a year work there asses off, mine do, and pay more than HALF to TWO THIRDS of their incomes in tax, and are most likely putting government students through school. Plus, these school get all their funding from the parents and what gvt funding the do recieve is "diddly squat". Don't think howard is making policies so 'rich' people get richer.
Im sorry if you think im having a go at you, but this issue really irritates me. All the opportunities and good education and mindsets are simply ones that we've provided, and paid for, ourselves.

 

[Enlightened_One]

Originally posted by glycerine
I'm going to be completely honest here, because from my limited interaction with you in like five posts, I respect you.

It's very easy, when you live on the North Shore, and go to a very upper class school, to ignore the blue-collar Australian population. After all, it doesn't necessarily affect you all too much if HECs fees go up or down; you can probably afford to pay full fees. The tax cuts in the latest budget are a *good* thing for your parents; for people not so financially secure, they get diddly squat. You probably don't have to worry about the state of the public health system; chances are, you can easily afford to go private. The Liberal government is in much the same situation - they can - and do! - find it very easy to forget that not everyone has $15,000 a year to spare to send their children to private schooling. The reason I respect Mark Latham, is because he doesn't forget these things. In all his plans for Australia, the lower classes are being taken care of as needed, as are (proportinately) the middle and upper classes. I know where he grew up, it's very close to where I grew up, and is the same place as where my mother grew up. I agreed with the referendum (ie: would have voted yes), as I am very against the monarchy on the whole. Also, Latham does not plan on cutting ties with Bush. I don't think he plans to be his lapdog a la Howard, but assuming that, just because he is not a conservative, that he opposes our ties with the US, is a bit of a generalisation.

In conclusion, I would vote Latham if only my 18th birthday was not about 9 months after the latest date the election could be. : )


Edit: I made some generalisations based on where you live, your school and your grandfather. Sorry if they're incorrect : )

For most of that, right on Glycerine. Support the average Australian. That's what we need. A leader who looks out for the majority, not the wealthy minority

 

[Enlightened_One]

Originally posted by Persephone87
The People who pay 15 000 a year work there asses off, mine do, and pay more than HALF to TWO THIRDS of their incomes in tax, and are most likely putting government students through school. Plus, these school get all their funding from the parents and what gvt funding the do recieve is "diddly squat". Don't think howard is making policies so 'rich' people get richer.
Im sorry if you think im having a go at you, but this issue really irritates me. All the opportunities and good education and mindsets are simply ones that we've provided, and paid for, ourselves.

Thanks for hitting the nail on the head (i love my metaphors in case you haven't guessed). Government schools get government funding because they are run by the government.
Government schools get the funding because they are provided free to give all Australians a fair go at an education.
If your parents are working themselves dead to pay for your federally funded, elite, private school, transfer to a public school.
And so you know, about the same money goes into private schools as it does public schools. This is despite the fact that public school has three or four times the number of students that private schools have. So when it comes down to it, private school kids get more per person than public school kids.

And your family has a choice to send you to a FREE, FAIR, public school, or an expensive, 'elite' private school. Your family made their choice, live with it.

 

[Enlightened_One]

Oh, Perosphone87, sorry if the attack seems a bit personal, I try not to do that sort of thing, but the gap between the wealthy schools and the average government school pisses me off.
Take a walk through Knoc Grammar School then take a walk through my school, or any one of the public schools like mine before you winge.

 

[glycerine]

Originally posted by Persephone87
The People who pay 15 000 a year work there asses off, mine do, and pay more than HALF to TWO THIRDS of their incomes in tax, and are most likely putting government students through school. Plus, these school get all their funding from the parents and what gvt funding the do recieve is "diddly squat". Don't think howard is making policies so 'rich' people get richer.
Im sorry if you think im having a go at you, but this issue really irritates me. All the opportunities and good education and mindsets are simply ones that we've provided, and paid for, ourselves.

Actually, private schools receive more government funding than government schools, despite having that considerable external funding.
I know how hard some people work. My parents do. I'm one of the lucky people who could afford to pay $15,000 a year for school if I really wanted to. I chose to go to a selective school instead, because I believe in the public system, and dislike the atmosphere in private schools very much.

You have to look at this as a cycle though. Say, your great grandfather got rich somehow of his own accord. Your grandfather then is able to have all the opportunities in the world, meaning he can afford to receive a top notch education to become a barrister. By being a barrister, he himself becomes very rich. Your father is then afforded the same opportunities to become rich, and then you are. Can you see how that works? Realistically, very few fortunes are self made; they come as a result of opportunities afforded to the generations before you. It's the same with poverty; very often, it is a cycle, one that is not very easily broken.

 

[Enlightened_One]

Good point Glycerine. Some people try to break the poverty though by going to uni, where they amass huge HECS debts, but then they end up becoming rich, and therir kids end up rich.
Still, there are many who because of Brendan Nelson and his rises can't afford that even. So once more they are caught in the poverty trap.

 

[Persephone87]

Originally posted by glycerine


You have to look at this as a cycle though. Say, your great grandfather got rich somehow of his own accord. Your grandfather then is able to have all the opportunities in the world, meaning he can afford to receive a top notch education to become a barrister. By being a barrister, he himself becomes very rich. Your father is then afforded the same opportunities to become rich, and then you are. Can you see how that works? Realistically, very few fortunes are self made; they come as a result of opportunities afforded to the generations before you. It's the same with poverty; very often, it is a cycle, one that is not very easily broken.

Well that is true. In many cases. But there is also a thing called entrepeneurial spirit. My background , not 3 generations ago, were blue collar workers, and just your average australians on one side, and immigrants in another. I too, will start at the bottom: my parents wont pay for uni, I have to get a job- an this mindset is true in many families- to make your own way without mothers apron strings. Frankly, those who are coddled will be disadvantaged in the long run, who cares about them? No one likes a snivelly nosed rich kid. And I'd hate the connontation that I might be one. If there is any legacy, and there is no exception to this, it is that your parents will adopt and pass on a particular attitude on the making of money- and lets face it there will always be those who inherit. So what? Good for them if thats the case. I believe your only trapping yourself in the 'poor' cycle if you yourself are trapped in that mindset. I grant that it is not just enough to have a good credit rating, but here is where the Latham/Howard isssue comes into play. Howard does not 'forget' the government schools, in fact, he realises thats where Australia's future lies: The are selective schools, there are single sex schools, there are creative arts schools, there are co-ed schools...so many options, and if you work hard enough you can excel. We live in a midlle class society, there really is no upper ranks (unlike america...thats a whole other can of worms... ). And on a last note (though i don't doubt you'll reply...), there are LOTS of blue collar workers who make HEAPS of money, i.e. plumbers, electricians, painters....

 

[Katjif]

I also go the $15,000 a year school. My parents work their guts out and my brother and I are both privelaged enough to attend such a school. I went to a great public school when I was younger and my sister continues at that school, with my older sister at a great selective public school.

My parents didn't choose a private school on the basis of it being "private" but on the basis of it providing what they felt to be, things that were important for my needs.

Do I feel that "elite" atmosphere that a lot of people feel? NO. Can I understand why some people would feel it? Of course I do.
But the point of the matter is, that no matter what school you go to/went to, it's irrelevant.
If you are going to make the most out of your life, be it working at a tiny little fish and chip shop getting $15 an hour, or as a high rise living CEO making upwards of $200,000 a year, you have to be happy..

Don' t presume that private schools are elite or different. The kids at your local public school and at your local private school, may have different upbringings, but in the end, we all end up making our own choices. If you are happy with the fish and chip shop that's awesome. If you are happy as the CEO, that's great. But if you're happy in general, that's way more important.

Ok, rant over now

 

[Persephone87]

I agree with Katjif. I also went to a public scool for primary too.

 

[Nescient]

Originally posted by Katjif

Don' t presume that private schools are elite or different. The kids at your local public school and at your local private school, may have different upbringings, but in the end, we all end up making our own choices. If you are happy with the fish and chip shop that's awesome. If you are happy as the CEO, that's great. But if you're happy in general, that's way more important.

Ok, rant over now

OK OK... u say either way they have to make their own choices... but the fact is people with lower SES (social-economic statu) attending public schools and what not have in most instances have less choices due to the lack of money/funds what ever you want to call it. So in the end it is the choices that we make...but sometimes those choices arent available to us...

someguy said something about johnny not making the rich richer?! yeh he isnt, but he's keeping the poor poor and the rich rich... he doesnt help the aussie batler... where as labor would...

 

[glycerine]

Yeah, I respect the not living off your parents, and I respect that choices are self made, but poverty can be a very binding thing, and it's not as easy as saying "Okay, I'll work hard and make lots of money". Ultimately, you have to spend money to make money, and if you don't have that money to spend, it can be very difficult.

For example, say you have the potential to be an absolutely brilliant saxophone player and tour the world making lots of money, but you live in housing commission in Minto. Where would your family get the money to buy/rent a saxophone, not to mention pay for lessons and reeds etc? That's an example of poverty squashing potential that could quite easily be fulfilled in an upper class context. Granted, my hypothetical person - let's just call her Lisa - could always work very hard in school or somewhere else and go and make money elsewhere, eventually allowing them to fulfill their musical potential, but can you see how this wouldn't even be an issue for someone attending Abbotsleigh versus someone attending, say, James Meehan high?

 

[Persephone87]

In the end, there won't be that sort of equality capable in any economy: case in point being Russia, and what good did that do them? One can fight that, and it would be an uphill battle, and the conclusion will be that the system in place is working in good order. Maybe we are getting ahead of ourselves. After all, we enjoy one of the highest quality of standards of living in the world...the fact that we are getting an AUSTRALIAN education is something to be thankful for. I also think that all these percieved disadvantages have a way of evening themselves out- 90% of all school leavers will seek out some sort of further qualification, whatever it might be. However, I think your example is flawed, simply on a technicality. Anyone who pursues a career in the performing arts and music arena is disadvantaged! The only things that count are talent, the ability to present oneself, and being deemed worthy fodder for the entertainment machine...some might have all of these attributes, or none: passion and ability is not increased by your schools whereabouts. If anything, it is the interest fostered by these independant schools that allow more success than anything- and that is purely for the parents and students own pleasure.

And getting back on to topic (somewhat ), I beg to differ on the idea of 'poverty' in Australia...whilst I'd like to think this does not occur as a statistic in any form, I don't like to think I'm stupid either... This present government and many others before it have tirelessly worked to institute every possible scheme and program to eliminate it- if for pride and an election soap-box for nothing else. At the same time, there has been no discussion on this specifically on either side. I still hold firm that Labour could potentially be a good governing body, but their leaders have rapidly declined and slid downhill since and during Keatings term. I do not need to add the obvious aside of his outcome in office...
I recognise that Howards government has made some not so wise descision making (I went to the No War protest with the other 350 thousand people), but what he has done, such as steadying our economy, creating prosperous ties with other nations and serving as a strong voice throughout Australasia and on the global scene, has been invaluable to us as a nation.

 

[ameh]

i suppose ur voting liberal?